Chinese purchase of Su-35

kroko said:

i dont understand chinese, and where did this documents came from? please indicate some sources, instead of just posting some papers.

Click to expand...

SinoSoldier said:

Another reason why the Chinese are unlikely to procure the Su-35, even if its published specifications are superior to that of the J-11B, is because of their experience with the original batches of Su-27. The J-11B was developed partly because the original Su-27 deliveries did not satisfy China's criteria. The Air Force was surprised at the unsatisfactory specifications even though the Su-27 was one of the most proliferated planes at the time. The PLAAF might feel the same thing about a similar Su-35 deal especially when no foreign country has purchased it. If the PLAAF was serious about a Su-35 deal they would have observed the usage and service life of the Su-35 before making the choice, but so far no country has inducted it in large numbers. By the time the PLAAF can make a serious and accurate assessment of the Su-35's qualities through observing it in foreign service, its fifth generation jets would have hit the press.

Click to expand...

thunderchief said:

What original Su-27 ? You mean Su-27SK from 90's ? If PLAAF was so unsatisfied why did China ordered Su-30MKK ?

Click to expand...

SinoSoldier said:

It was posted on CDF; there are also running rumors that those two missiles are in the pipeline, possibly for Type 055.

Click to expand...

kroko said:

people can post whatever papers/diagrams they want on a internet forum. Without a source to where people can trace it, its pretty much of dubious value IMO.

Click to expand...

SinoSoldier said:

At that time PLAAF had no other option for a strike fighter that could carry out both ground attack and air defense.

Click to expand...

thunderchief said:

Well , currently China has no other option for a fighter with super-cruise ability and ability to detect stealth 5th gen fighters . Could China afford to wait for J-20 , or at least for a J-11B with powerful enough electric installation to support ~10kW average power - I don´t know .

Click to expand...

SinoSoldier said:

The recently unveiled Chinese radar beats the Irbis-E in most major aspects and the Sino-Flankers have AESA upgrades. Electronics shouldn't be an issue.

Click to expand...

Bltizo said:

Agreed. Whether the shortfall in fighters is something the PLAAF is willing to tolerate and work through is up to their discretion.




I thought we were comparing Su-35 versus Chinese flankers based on their own merits (in this case, range of weapons/weapons suite) and not on their compatability with the PLAAF logistics chain. Yes I agree, Su-35 can't use chinese weapons.

Click to expand...

Bltizo said:

Maybe I was vague in my original few posts for which I apologize, but the lack of a heavy weight, long range air superiority aircraft was my point the whole time (sinosoldier mentioned J-7s and J-8s in an earlier reply regarding my use of the general word "fighter" where I realized the word could be easily interpreted as any "fighter" rather than my intended meaning of "flanker" or more specifically, air superiority, heavy weight, long range and persistent fighter. I mean when I mentioend "shortfall of fighters" I'm sure it carried across that I didn't mean a shortfall of J-7s or J-8s or even J-10s.).

And J-11B have in turn recently defeated J-10s in exercises I believe. Weight class isn't moot because range and persistence and the ability to operate from a distance is very much relevant.

If you want to say that I've moved the goal posts, fine. I've moved them.

I suppose now this part of the debate will transition to whether J-10 can be as persistent and long ranged an air superiority fighter as J-11B, and whether their difference is significant enough to warrant purchase of Su-35. I personally do not know, but it is one of the more probable causes for a potential Su-35 purchase.

Click to expand...

Bltizo said:

My overall premise is that the domestic industry cannot produce heavy weight air superiority flanker type fighters fast enough. Sub premises includes the SAC's inability to produce flankers enough, and the sub premise that no other contractor can produce heavy weight air superiority flanker type aircraft, as well as the fact that the time taken to set up or retool another production line to produce flankers will be too late for the PLAAF's projected fleet requirement.

CAC doesn't come into this, unless they can somehow produce an deliver flankers within the PLAAF's requested timeline.

Click to expand...

Bltizo said:

Fair enough, but that's a generalization I'd prefer not to accept so candidly.
Westerners also holistically accuse chinese engines of being unreliable, and we know that's not wholly true, I'd prefer not to dismiss the products of other nations on such a whim.

Click to expand...

Bltizo said:

That's probably the best counter argument to have come out of this entire discussion.

This is becoming very nitty gritty and out of my depth. I'm not sure how important having a desired number of airframes available is, to an air force's mission, and it's far out of my depth to weigh up how combat effective a PLAAF with 24 Su-35s will be compared to a PLAAF without 24 Su-35s, except possibly that the former may be able to conduct more sorties (but then again, the latter may be able to absorb personnel from that regiment of Su-35s and distribute them to other areas of the air force, improving functioning in other areas).

All I will say is that military arms often make a point to sustain a certain quantity of machines of a particular type... and the PLAAF will have to weigh up the costs and benefits of integrating a regiment or however many Su-35.

Click to expand...

Bltizo said:

A potential limitation, but not unresolvable.

Click to expand...